2018-08-23-ZBA-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

complicated sites. This is a solution that has been in place since 2011 and is not an uncommon situation. It means that some progress has been made and it means they are moving towards a better solution. In order to reach a permanent solution, they need to complete their 4th round of sampling, look at the data, and decide whether the site has received a permanent solution. The data they have been collecting is looking good. His understanding is that the initial response was to a dry well where oil was and another area where gasoline was spilled. The soil there has some residual contamination. They have to determine if it poses a risk to health, safety, and environment. There is a large span of action they have to follow in order to reach a permanent solution). Ms. Pappo presented a map showing the property. She believes they have to expand the area because it's affecting more than 1 acre. Ms. Pappo asked if Mr. Carroll owns the well on 4 Clematis Street because it's not closed (no). Ms. Pappo asked the applicant how he knows that there won't be another spill (Mr. Borrebach responded that there were 2 private drinking wells— 36 Allen and 4 Clematis. The well at 4 Clematis is irrigation only. The well at 36 Allen was closed and Mr. Carroll extended public water to those residences. There are groundwater standards and drinking water standards. The impacted area is bigger than one acre and extends outside the one acre limits. There's not much certainty about what would happen in the future, but an immediate response is easier to handle. To get to permanent closure, they have done 3 rounds of sampling, and they are doing a 4th round within the next month). Ms. Pappo asked how the gas is stored on the property (Mr. John Carroll responded that the gas gets deposited in a tank and gets pumped into their cars. He has a piece of equipment that takes oil from underneath the vehicle. They suck the antifreeze out that's picked up by Clean Harbors). Ms. Wood asked if that is done on the one acre parcel (Mr. Carroll responded yes). Ms. Pappo stated the map on the Town website shows the area for the junk yard and waste disposal is much larger than one acre and the aerial view shows trucks all over the property. Ms. Pappo asked for clarification on where the one acre is located. The conditions on the decision 5 years ago are not being adhered to and she would like to request a a continuance of the hearing until more information is received (Ms. Wood responded that a continuance must be requested by the applicant and the Board is limited to discussing only the one acre of land referenced in the application. Ms. Wood advised Ms. Pappo that the appropriate enforcement needs to be notified when there are noise complaints and other issues. Ms. Pappo again stated that she can't tell from the maps provided where the one acre is located. A Board Member, Mr. Williams, stated that he has seen this Special Permit renewal many times and when he went out to the property to see the stakes, they were in the same location as they were 10 years ago. A Board Member, Mr. Clifford, stated that the only official map is the one recorded with the Registry. He doesn't know if there is an actual map on file, but the acre described would be the same as the one in the original decision. The stakes accurately mark where the one acre is. An audience member, Mr. Jay Parsons of 65 Allen St, asked why the official map hasn't been produced (Mr. Clifford stated that in most cases, a certified plot plan is required. One of the